linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] forcedeth: several proposed updates for testing

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20071007090808.GB733@elte.hu>
Date:	Sun, 7 Oct 2007 11:08:08 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Ayaz Abdulla <aabdulla@...dia.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] forcedeth: several proposed updates for testing


* Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> wrote:

> * I feel TX NAPI is a useful tool, because it provides an independent TX
>   process control point and system load feedback point.
>   Thus I felt this was slightly superior to tasklets.

/me agrees violently

btw., when i played with this tunable under -rt:

 enum {
         NV_OPTIMIZATION_MODE_THROUGHPUT,
         NV_OPTIMIZATION_MODE_CPU
 };
 static int optimization_mode = NV_OPTIMIZATION_MODE_THROUGHPUT;

the MODE_CPU one gave (much) _higher_ bandwidth. The queueing model in 
forcedeth seemed to be not that robust and i think a single queueing 
model should be adopted instead of this tunable. (which i think just hid 
some bug/dependency) But i never got to the bottom of it so it's just 
the impression i got.

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/